Two Three for the road:A Very-Good-News Story: Microbursts and U.S. Aviation – WunderBlog (Thanks to @ElieBilmes)
I still get anxious thinking about an attempt (or three, actually) our USAir 767 made to land in a nasty thunderstorm in Charlotte more than 20 years ago. As this article details, this threat has been all but eliminated in the US thanks to technology.

Similar Posts

Continue the conversation via emailGet only replies to your comment, the best of the rest, as well as a daily recap of all comments on this post. No more than a few emails daily, which you can reply to/unsubscribe from directly from your inbox.

I remember hearing years ago that Charlotte was notorious for microbursts. One of my earliest flight experiences when I was in college in the early 1970s was being on a plane (Eastern, probably a DC-9) that was hit by a windshear precisely at touchdown. The experience was BANG with a hard hit to the left, then a quick bounce to the right, followed by a half-inch-deep rush of blue water down the aisle from the front of the plane. As I recall, as we deplaned (some of us having already delunched) one of the pilots said that the tower told him one wing almost touched the ground, and that that the wind problems at Charlotte were due to a lake near the end of the runway (Judging from Google Earth, probably Lake Wylie, which is under the approach to runway 5 (5/23 and the current 18L/36R being the only runways back then).

There was an incident in 2014 – Express Embraer ERJ-145 near London Ontario on Sep 5th 2014, – where the aircraft flew into severe weather resulting in a loss of control and dropped 4000 feet. While the investigation identified both human errors and technological shortcomings, in itself it makes for interesting reading. I know that frequently we are inclined to scoff at “those nice big fluffy clouds.” Clearly, we need to exercise extreme caution at all times, and not underestimate the power of Mother Nature!

absolutely everything that is not western, as in USA, from the aeroplanes to the people, is no good. Nothing. I have flown a few Russian planes, and they are at least as good as any. Actually, they are more robust than anything that Boeing has ever built. Ask an expert. Plus, I have been through European shortages after WW II, so I know what it is like to make do with little. It is an admirable feat, not to be belittled by anybody. By they way, I have no use for the regime of North Korea, or the corruption they did to an otherwise not so bad ideology. Interestingly enough, I have no use for the corrupted ideology of certain places on this here continent either.

That’s all well and good, but I don’t see where you’ve said how Perrella’s article was patronizing, which was Joe’s request, let alone indicative of a viewpoint that “absolutely everything that is not western, as in USA, from the aeroplanes to the people, is no good.” I personally didn’t find the CNN excerpt or the original articles in Airways patronizing. Instead I’d characterize it as a combination of amazement and respect of an operation as small as and as hand-to-mouth as Air Koryo being able to maintain a diverse and old fleet in what’s apparently a great manner.

The way I always heard it was that the Soviets built their planes to be more utilitarian and rugged (with many having the STOL, the ability to take off from gravel/unpaved runways, etc), while the West put more money into airport infrastructure (paved runways, better ground aids) and pax creature comforts (though some may argue the latter point, at least for aircraft made in the later years of the USSR).

Interesting to read the full 3-part series on flying the Russian planes. I would love to see the mayhem that would result in the US if an airline tried to board a wide-body plane that had no overhead bins down the center, without changing their carryon policies. It’s bad enough on some of the 737s and 320s when you board late; a plane with ~1/2 the overhead space per seat of those would be nothing but gate checked bags after the elites and families boarded.